Home > crime > Guilty plea and prison for Nelson

Guilty plea and prison for Nelson

Readers will remember the traffic incident in which a Courthouse Market employee shot out his back window at a vehicle that was repeatedly ramming him from behind at 14th and H Streets in Eureka.  Mark Anthony Nelson shot three times and hit the woman driver in the face and arm.

Press release from the Humboldt County District Attorney’s office:

On Friday, December 02, 2011, Mark Anthony Nelson, 31, of Eureka, pleaded guilty to felony shooting into an occupied vehicle. This was a strike offense as Nelson was a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. Nelson will serve a stipulated term of 6 years and 4 months in the California Department of Corrections.

If there were charges filed against the woman ramming Nelson’s vehicle we missed it.

  1. HUUFC
    December 2, 2011 at 8:48 pm

    A fine member of society,a plea bargin to get rid of attempted murder, smart convict. I wonder if he gets day for day or 80% either way he will be back.

  2. tra
    December 2, 2011 at 9:11 pm

    I have yet to hear any explanation as to why the woman was repeatedly ramming his car with hers. I realize that’s not directly relevant to the issue of him being a felon in possession of a firearm, but it certainly seems relevant to what degree he was assaulting her versus to what degree he was engaging in an act of self-defense. Anybody got any further details on why she was ramming his car with hers in the first place?

  3. Plain Jane
    December 2, 2011 at 9:28 pm

    There was obviously a lot more to the story than we know. It sounded like something out of a gangster movie. If he hadn’t used a gun, it’s possible she would be the one going to prison; although we don’t know that she wasn’t charged as well. His illegal possession of a gun and shooting at her for ramming his car repeatedly shouldn’t cancel her criminal behavior.

  4. December 3, 2011 at 6:42 am

    I have yet to hear any explanation as to why the woman was repeatedly ramming his car with hers.

    That’s what I’m wondering. Did they know each other previously?

  5. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 7:02 am

    I’m sure the T-S will give the woman thorough coverage in its Monday edition. That’s where all their journalism is going to go now.

  6. Decline To State
    December 3, 2011 at 7:06 am

    It is curious that “the woman” wasn’t charges with assault with a deadly weapon. As far as I know we were never even given her name. Something smells here.

  7. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 8:03 am

    The T-S said Nelson cut the woman off as he changed lanes, then the woman began tailgating him and eventually rammed his car several times. It sounds like a case of road rage against someone also prone to rage. They did not say if the woman was charged.

  8. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 8:05 am

    Her name is Adrianne Andrews – front page of the TS

  9. December 3, 2011 at 8:40 am

    It does seem rather unfair that the fellow who was simply defending himself from an attacker was treated much more harshly by the justice system than the person who instigated this confrontation . I’m less interested in the woman’s name than in asking “who does she know?”.

    Obviously as a convicted felon, Mark Nelson should not have had a firearm, However, it did come in awfully handy in this situation when he had to defend his life.He’ll have to face the consequences regardless.

    As far as we know Ms Andrews, clearly the aggressor in this situation is still able to drive and purchase firearms pending her next outburst of explosive violence..

    It makes me suspicious that this boils down to what Muhammad Ali used to call ” the right complexion and the right connections”

  10. SmokeMonster
    December 3, 2011 at 9:32 am

    Some of you should pull your head out of your conspiracy theories,she was arrested the day before for drunken shoplifting,I’m sure she frequents the ingomar club. Shes probably involved in skull and bones and the illuminati as well.
    For Rob Ash to bring racism onto this is pitiful. Let me gues the 2 guys that just shot a benbow homeowner in the head during a recent home invasion are probably innocent as well right. Wait wasn’t mark arrested in Oakland for selling crack cocaine? Now hes shooting a woman with a gun. If anything I see a pattern of idiots from Oakland terrorizing northcoast residents. Some make this fool mark out to be a victim. I’m standing by my original post from the first story.
    He ripped her off in a pot/drug deal, she was pissed chased him down and he got away,now he’s going to prison she’s not,or her medical condition is to bad to be charged right now,she was shot in the FACE and chest. Its not rocket science.
    Cheri Moore gets gunned down and she’s the victim,this woman gets gunned down and some of you are standing up for the crack selling convicted felon,that had no concern for what would happen after he shot this woman,didn’t care if her car veered into a lawn with children playing in it,didn’t care if it ran into other innocent drivers it was all about Mark getting HIMSELF away and time to hide whatever and figure out his story.

  11. DJ
    December 3, 2011 at 9:35 am

    From the TS:

    “Andrews — who had been arrested the day prior to the shooting on suspicion of shoplifting while intoxicated”

    Stay tuned. This name will show up again in the DUI arrest section of the TS.

  12. Bolithio
    December 3, 2011 at 9:36 am

    Is shooting someone in the face, “simply defending” yourself? I would have defended my self by driving away! Perhaps 200 feet over to the police station!

  13. Mitch
    December 3, 2011 at 9:39 am

    Does the T-S say she’s been charged? Does it say she’s not been charged? Does the T-S tell us why law enforcement and/or the DA did or did not take action against her?

    Hopefully, Thad will report, and those who read the T-S can let us know.

  14. December 3, 2011 at 10:18 am

    Bolithio wrote, I would have defended my self by driving away. Perhaps 200 feet over to the police station!.

    13th and H is a bit more than 200′ to the police station, and what if she would have kept after him. I’ve heard many reports of road ragers chasing people.

    Robash wrote, Mark Nelson should not have had a firearm,….

    I think there is a valid case- often made by libertarians- that felons might well have the need to defend themselves just like anyone else, especially since nowadays just about anything can be classified as a felony.

    I believe Nelson does have some violent crimes on his record. Still, if he didn’t start it, it sure doesn’t seem fair he takes the hit and she walks. If nothing else, maybe keep the felon in possession of a firearm, but drop the shooting into an occupied vehicle charge as it seems to be in self- defense.

    The gal should be charged with reckless driving at the very least.

  15. Walt
    December 3, 2011 at 10:32 am

    On the other hand, getting shot in the face and arm is a powerful disincentive to ram someone else’s car. Bet she doesn’t do THAT again. With all the people packin’ these days, I’m reluctant to honk or flip someone off.

  16. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 11:05 am

    Good call Fred, we should all carry guns and shoot at each other when we’re angry or feel threatened. Because bullets never go through or by their targest to hit an innocent child or other persons, and speeding swerving cars never kill someone who happens to be in the way. They’re both wrong, they both put people around them in danger, and both should be punished and not allowed to drive.

    Did either of them have their license revoked?

  17. Bolithio
    December 3, 2011 at 12:25 pm

    I thought it happened by the AA for some reason. But still, even if she did chase after him, opening fire is an extreme response in my opinion.

  18. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 1:00 pm

    The law is wise that bans felons from possessing firearms. Follow the law or face the consequences. Period.

  19. December 3, 2011 at 1:02 pm

    …even if she did chase after him, opening fire is an extreme response in my opinion..

    Not everyone might chose to do so, but if someone was ramming my car, especially with me in it, I figure deadly force could be considered an appropriate response.

  20. Plain Jane
    December 3, 2011 at 1:26 pm

    That’s why they try to keep mentally ill people from having weapons too, Fred.

  21. December 3, 2011 at 2:16 pm

    Police have shot at, and killed, people for less threatening acts with cars than ramming.

  22. Plain Jane
    December 3, 2011 at 2:40 pm

    Cops receive extensive training in quick evaluation of risks involved with firing their guns, Fred. They (usually) don’t just start shooting out of fear or anger without consideration for innocent bystanders.

  23. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    “if someone was ramming my car, especially with me in it, I figure deadly force could be considered an appropriate response.”

    Sorry Fred, I ‘figure’ (and would bet good money) that you’d be doin’ jail time if you killed someone in the open streets ‘cuz you felt threatened by them rammin’ your car. It ain’t the wild west any more pardner.

    “Police have shot at, and killed, people for less threatening acts with cars than ramming.”

    I’d also like an example where police shot at someone in a moving car, on an open public street, because they felt the person’s driving was a danger to the public. This sounds like a Fox News quote of “I’ve heard…”

  24. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    I think she was charged with dui, but not positive.

    An unusual case. She kind of started it but he over reacted.. Probably an appropriate plea deal/agrangement

  25. tra
    December 3, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    So from what I’m reading here, it sounds like it was just a fluke — what happens when two people prone to extreme overreaction just randomly met in just the right circumstances. What are the odds on something like that?

    I mean how many people are prone to road-rage so extreme that they’d start smashing their car into someone else’s car just because they got cut off? Not that many people, obviously, otherwise we’d be hearing about it every day, since there’s no shortage of people who cut others off in traffic. But, obviously there’s a few road-ragers out there who are extreme enough to do that sort of thing. Maybe .0001% of drivers?

    But now consider that for events to have unfolded the way they apparently did, the unstable roadrager woman had to direct her little automotive tantrum at someone who was armed, and the armed person also had to be an overreactor to the degree that they would actually open fire on her. I don’t know how many people (not including cops) are driving around with a handgun within their reach, but I’m pretty sure it’s got to be less than 10%. So far so good, but then how many of those would have actually opened fire in those circumstances? Taking that into account, I think we’re probably down in the range of .01% of the population.

    So I guess the question is, what are the chances of the .0001%er the population getting cut off in traffic by the .01%er?

  26. tra
    December 3, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    And are the odds of that happening better or worse than the odds of having a piano fall on your head on a Manhattan sidewalk?

  27. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 4:45 pm

    If I was on the jury, I’d have found him not guilty. It sounds like self defense to me… one more reason I don’t like our DA.

  28. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 5:06 pm

    Ya Anon 4:45, it shouldn’t be a crime to fire bullets out your back window while driving 50 MPH up H Street. I mean this doesn’t put anyone at risk and is a reasonable reaction given the situation.

  29. Dr. Pepper
    December 3, 2011 at 5:18 pm

    Didn’t Gene Bass kill someone a few years ago in front of that night club on 5th? Shot him for driving on the sidewalk. Refresh my memory.

    Did Bass do any time?

  30. December 3, 2011 at 6:11 pm

    Didn’t Gene Bass kill someone a few years ago in front of that night club on 5th?

    You referring to the private security guard that shot a guy who drove his car up in front of the night club and was believed to be intending to run over people?

    As an aside, I find it amazing how polarized we are on nearly every issue and how we obviously disagree on nearly everything. At least to a fair extent. Notice how this started out with what seemed to be most agreeing. Then it got into the us vs. them thing, politically, anyway.

    I’ve wrote it before here and elsewhere, but I see no hope for a peaceful solution to any political issues amongst us.

  31. Walt
    December 3, 2011 at 7:19 pm

    “but I see no hope for a peaceful solution to any political issues amongst us.” This format seems reasonably peaceful. We may never agree, but we’re not shooting each other.

  32. Plain Jane
    December 3, 2011 at 7:44 pm

    “but I see no hope for a peaceful solution to any political issues amongst us.”

    We’ve been able to peacefully disagree on solutions to political issues for most of our history, trying different sides solutions but there have always been those who think violence is an acceptable option.

  33. Yayouknowme
    December 3, 2011 at 7:51 pm

    Maybe she wasn’t down with O.P.P.

  34. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 10:08 pm

    This whole thing was bad choices

  35. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 10:17 pm

    I heard she lost all hearing in one of her ears. One side of her face if frozen left eye doesn’t close all the way. she has major breathing problems and a metal plate in her arm. Also bullet fragments still close to her spine. Lucky she wasn’t charged with anything? Sounds like she has a life sentence if you ask me.

  36. December 3, 2011 at 10:33 pm

    “Sounds like she has a life sentence if you ask me.”

    And if he had sustained a permanent injury in the mêlée, would Anonymous be making the same plea for amnesty on his behalf?

    I’m just asking, since Anonymous is inviting questions.

  37. Anonymous
    December 3, 2011 at 10:49 pm

    I think they should just let him go in response to you Joel M

  38. December 3, 2011 at 10:52 pm

    Compelling argument, Anonymous 10:49. Thanks for taking the time to share.

  39. Mitch
    December 4, 2011 at 7:13 am

    Aren’t there attorneys involved, public defenders if not private? Has anyone in the local press called the attorneys, if only to report they say “no comment?”

    Look at this: a shooting incident on the main road in the main population center, and yet people are wondering on this blog what might have happened, with essentially no information from the people who have chosen to cover this sort of thing as a career. How much more “major news” do things get? It’s real news and it’s even tabloid-worthy, as in “blood on the street.”

    And we still don’t know who pooped and pee’d on the bank, do we? No surveillance video, huh?

  40. Mitch
    December 4, 2011 at 7:24 am

    Oh, Fred? Americans are not polarized on almost every issue. On many issues, there are substantial majorities in support of the “left” point of view, which is in reality the centrist point of view.

    When this is presented in the form of simple polling numbers, things are clear. It’s only when it is turned into quotes from bought and paid for politicians, as blathered upon by the Sabbath gasbags and the Fox propagandists, that the waters get muddy.

    Single payer health care has long had majority support. Majorities feel abortion should be legal. Majorities have no problem with raising tax rates on millionaires.

    Remember the huge problems the Marines were going to have if they were forced to expose their pee-pees in front of known homosexuals? Never happened, never existed.

  41. Mitch
    December 4, 2011 at 7:31 am

    Oh, yeah. Fred? You’ll have no problem pointing to polls showing the opposite of what I’ve just said. Please don’t bother.

    To find the real polls, you have to look at the ones that are conducted BEFORE an issue becomes a political lightning rod.

    Once the advertisements and misinformation campaigns have begun, and until the legislation is passed or canned, the poll numbers will change. That’s why, in a former democracy that still has the notion of “voting,” it’s very valuable to be able to spend unlimited money on manipulating people.

    Do you really think most people think 99% of climate scientists are engaged in a campaign of fraud? If you do, I can tell you exactly why you think that.

  42. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 8:52 am

    There’s been a term coined for that manipulation, Mitch. It’s called “manufactured consent.” Using focus groups to pick the most effective “frame” for polling questions and then reporting the results in groups divided by ages or sex or political ideology or country of the region, etc. gives them the “majority opinions” they need to influence the opinions of those not polled. Health care reform and higher taxes on the rich are excellent examples. When people were asked if they wanted single payer / universal insurance, an overwhelming majority said yes. Months later after all the “death panel” BS, they were polled as to whether they wanted Obamacare or no reform.. They stopped even mentioning single payer. On taxes its the same. If they ask if people want taxes increases or entitlement cuts,, they say cuts. But if they are asked if they want the taxes on the rich to go up or cuts in SS and Medicare, they want the taxes increased on the rich.

  43. December 4, 2011 at 9:34 am

    I think if someone attacking you with a deadly weapon (in this case a speeding automobile ) , then you are entitled to defend your life with with whatever force is necessary.
    . That being said Nelson was someone who had a gun and criminal history.. He should obviously get in trouble just because of that. Nelson is quite deservedly going back to the poky where he obviously belongs.
    In regards to Ms. Andrews , This incident happened only a few blocks from my home. I’ve got a right to be concerned when someone comes to my neighborhood and acts like a raving homicidal lunatic, instigates a potentially deadly confrontation and apparently escapes any sanctions .from the law whatsoever..

  44. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 9:56 am

    I doubt many people would think having their car rammed from the back is a murder attempt, unless of course there is a cliff in front of them. However, I don’t believe injuries suffered as a result of a criminal act should be considered punishment for the act itself. Both of these dangerous crazy people should be in jail.

  45. Jess Askins
    December 4, 2011 at 10:16 am

    I think that shooting at someone through your own back window is maybe not responsible gun use, you should at least be sure what or who you are shooting at. That being said, since there is seemingly so little information available there are several possibilities to be considered.

    There is the possibility that she was shooting at him first. That would explain a man panicked enough to shoot out his own car window.

    Though this is farfetched, she does seem to be a bit agro so maybe Nelson prevented or stopped a killing spree before it really got started. After all the gun rights people say if everyone is armed then we will live in a safer world.

    Jess Askins

  46. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 10:31 am

    There were uninvolved witnesses to the event and no one, not even Nelson, has said anything about her shooting at him first, Jess. She rammed his car from behind more than once and he shot at her through his rear window. Why she rammed him, whether they knew each other and had a fight, etc. has not been reported.

  47. Jess Askins
    December 4, 2011 at 10:44 am

    Well Nelson hasn’t said anything in his own defense, so in the absence of real journalism and local corrupt government cover ups like the Tyson suit who knows.

    Nelson was probably offered the plea deal and told to shut up or he would get life. He was so railroaded he should be awarded a seat on the board of the NCRA.

  48. December 4, 2011 at 10:52 am

    Jane it’s certainly not far fetched to imagine someone being killed by having another car smash into their car..
    It , unfortunately happens many times every day all over the world.

    I say Nelson had good reason .to fear for his life when she was crashing into him.

  49. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 11:05 am

    Sure, people are killed when one car crashes into another, but most fatalities are due to front or side impact, not rear impact. The person in the rear vehicle in that type of collision is more likely to suffer injury than the person in the front car. They have to be traveling at a faster rate of speed than the car they are hitting so are more likely to have injuries from steering wheel or windshield impacts. The person in the front car is bumped forward and can suffer whiplash type injuries depending on the difference in their speeds, but not the sudden stop impact the rear car experiences.

  50. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 11:12 am

    Think about demolition derbies and most drivers’ preference being crashing into opponents with the rear of their car with driver’s side impacts against the rules.

  51. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 2:24 pm

    On the off-topic issue of manipulating opinions, an oldie but a goodie:

  52. suzy blah blah
    December 4, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    -but Jane, suzy dont need to know how dumb we is, i was hoping you posted a kutting edge demo derby video.

  53. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 3:15 pm

    I figerd yall cud fin it fer yersef Suzy.

    I just don’t understand how there could be so many people who don’t know the correct answers to those questions.

  54. suzy blah blah
    December 4, 2011 at 3:25 pm

    -I dont understand either, but im beginning to … i recently talked with a college grad who thought Freud wrote the Origin of the Species.

  55. Walt
    December 4, 2011 at 4:28 pm

    Haw! Even I know Michener rote that.

  56. Walt
    December 4, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    But I liked the movie better. Roddy McDowall wuz awesome!

  57. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 4:44 pm

    Wasn’t Roddy that guy who stabbed Jamie Lee Curtis’ mom in the shower?

  58. suzy blah blah
    December 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm

    -the shower scene in Planet of the Psychos was totally awesome! And i specially liked how the script followed Froid’s theory

  59. Plain Jane
    December 4, 2011 at 5:43 pm

    Froid’s theory is about how monkeys turned into peepil, right? Ah new we cud figgur it out.

  60. suzy blah blah
    December 4, 2011 at 6:59 pm

    -yup, something like that. And yet there are still some ignorant Creationists out here who havnt studied Hitchcock, or Froid or anything, and so they dont believe you when you tell them that if someone morphs into their mother, it happened according to –the survival of the fetishist. Or that if that same someone surprises you with a knife when youre in the shower, it’s called –natural selection. Makes me wanna SCREAM!!!

  61. SmokeMonster
    December 5, 2011 at 12:07 am

    From what I’ve heard Gene couldn’t pass the psych test for EPD,tell me that isn’t a scary thought.

    Rent a cops are like off track dog racing gamblers, degenerate losers.Yes he killed a drunk idiot in front of the old club.

  62. December 5, 2011 at 11:26 am

    I am amazed that anyone would question sending a guy to prison who recklessly fired a weapon on a crowded street and shot someone in the face. Whatever the motivation.

  63. December 5, 2011 at 6:48 pm

    I was actually in a car wreck where the vehicle in which I was riding got clipped from behind by a semi truck and spun several revolutions cross a busy five lane freeway . Very lucky to have survived that one relatively unscathed.. I know pretty well what can happen when a moving car gets struck from behind , that’s something I’ll never forget.
    Plus you see those NASCAR drivers spin cars out by bumping them from behind with annoying frequency. In those cases it’s not too dangerous because the race cars are equipped with every conceivable safety device . In a regular car that’s not the case.

  64. Bolithio
    December 6, 2011 at 9:18 am

    I am amazed that anyone would question sending a guy to prison who recklessly fired a weapon on a crowded street and shot someone in the face. Whatever the motivation.

    Yeah, exactly!

  65. December 7, 2011 at 6:55 pm

    “I am amazed that anyone would question sending a guy to prison who recklessly fired a weapon on a crowded street…”

    H Street may have a lot of traffic, but crowded, it isn’t. And the use of a firearm was clearly illegal, but so was the ramming of a vehicle from behind. As Rob Ash pointed out, ramming could be a lethal use of force.

  66. Bla bla bla
    July 30, 2016 at 3:12 pm

    Using a car to attack someone is just as deadly as the gun that set her straight. As for him, 6 years is a small price to pay for saving his own life, it sounds like he almost got,”Bruce Jenner’ed”. Better 6 than dead, and he deserved 6 for being a nigga w/a gun, w/priors. It appears that he got no time for the actual “bullet to the head”, which was the right thing to do. She was an active participant and instigator. Similar thing happened to me in Jefferson county, Oregon, so I pulled off the road, fast, I thought the town drunk was out of control. But it was the town sherriff, fishing for ethnic’s w/out-of-state plates. He wrote me a ticket for failing to signal when I pulled off the road and accused me of speeding and throwing cigarette’s out the window, that my drivers licence was fake. Hung me up for 2 hours on a snow covered highway, harassing and trying to misinterpret my words and actions. If I, A little Japanese dude gets nervous in small white towns, imagine how nervous and alone the black man is, I don’t care how big he is, He is scared. Ya got to keep him out but ya cant attack him. Talk to him about God,.. and your 3 time a week sessions, start introducing him to everyone around, He will leave, bad black likes to lie low.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s